←back to thread

The C23 edition of Modern C

(gustedt.wordpress.com)
515 points bwidlar | 1 comments | 15 Oct 24 16:06 UTC | HN request time: 0.237s | source
Show context
belter ◴[15 Oct 24 17:30 UTC] No.41850897[source]▶
Important reminder just in the Preface :-)

Takeaway #1: "C and C++ are different: don’t mix them, and don’t mix them up"

replies(8): >>41850960 #>>41851047 #>>41851166 #>>41851693 #>>41853183 #>>41855660 #>>41857019 #>>41858537 #
pjmlp ◴[15 Oct 24 17:35 UTC] No.41850960[source]▶
Specially relevant to all those folks that insist on "Coding C with a C++ compiler", instead of safer language constructs, and standard library alternatives provided by C++ during the last decades.
replies(3): >>41851031 #>>41851082 #>>41851268 #
com2kid ◴[15 Oct 24 17:48 UTC] No.41851082[source]▶
Perfectly valid to do if you need to interface with a large C code base and you just want to do some simple OO here and there. Especially if you cannot have runtime exceptions and the like.

This is how I managed to sneak C++ into an embedded C codebase. We even created some templates for data structures that supported static allocation at compile time.

replies(2): >>41851140 #>>41852515 #
f1shy ◴[15 Oct 24 17:53 UTC] No.41851140[source]▶
What would be an example of "simple OO here and there" that cannot be done cleanly in plain C?
replies(6): >>41851225 #>>41851244 #>>41851407 #>>41851799 #>>41851998 #>>41854294 #
1. bobmcnamara ◴[15 Oct 24 18:14 UTC] No.41851407[source]▶
Templating on pixel classes so that a blitter builds all supported pixel paths separately and inlines them.

Yes you can do it less cleanly with macros or inline functions. But you can't do it performantly with struct and function pointers.